I think most of the feedback you're going to receive here will have to do with this provision of the MA Practice Act:

4.03: Restricted and Prohibited Uses of Professional Titles

Neither the title "Architect" or any modification of said title shall be affixed or otherwise used in conjunction with any surname, word or business title when such use would imply that an individual, associate, partner or corporate officer is an architect when, in fact, such individual, associate, partner, or corporate officer is not a registered architect. 

Huh. Babs, I found this one:

https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXVI/Chapter112/Section60K

Massachusetss General Laws, Part I Title XVI Chapter 112

"Section 60K. No person shall, directly or indirectly, engage in the practice of architecture in this commonwealth, except as hereinafter set forth in section sixty L, or use the title “architect”, “registered architect”, “architectural designer”, or display or use any words, letters, figures, title, sign, card, advertisement or other device to indicate that such person offers to engage or engages in the practice of architecture unless he is registered under the provisions of sections sixty A to sixty O, inclusive. "

Which one do you think applies?

Also, Brandon, before this gets too heated (which is very likely): You said this: I'm looking for a professional opinion on the layout and design to ensure that we are not making any major mistakes.

You already have a professional opinion: that of Michelle Rice, Architectural Designer. That's why you hired her. You shouldn't expect to get better, more-informed, accurate or applicable advice from random people on the internet.

What Donna said... Didnt you already hire a professional? I vote for the 10 post rule.

Well ... maybe if Ms. Rice isn't licensed, then maybe he didn't actually hire a "professional".

So, he's coming here to get free advice from "real" professionals.

Yeah -- that makes a lot of sense.

There is currently no architect's license issued to a Michelle Rice showing on Massachusetts' website. It may have just been awarded on 3 February 2015, the day these drawings were issued, and not shown up on the site yet.

But even outside of the license issue, Brandon hired someone for their expertise, based on how they represent themselves. Not being an architect doesn't mean someone isn't a good designer, but representing oneself as an architect when one is not means that person is either ignorant of practice laws or engaging in fraud (neither of which is a quality I woudl necessarily recommend looking for in one's expert).

I love discussing titling! It's one of my favorite topics = geek.

I'm betting Michelle Rice is not going to be pleased that Brando O'Neal approached this forum with this question. Talk about "opening a can of worms" -- at so many levels. 

do you have permission to post those drawings?

Got butter?

-

Which way is north and what part of the country are you in?

Excellent and relevant question, Volunteer (I frequently forget to put a north arrow on my drawings and I hate myself whenever I do it!).

Where's Miles?

I think this guy works out of a jobsite trailer but he will work for cheap. Because kids.

Is that a sweat stain on his left arm, or a shadow? If it's a shadow, is it being cast from an enormous bottle of booze due to raising six kids on an architect's salary?!

^ What ever it is this is the goofball that did it!

I checked out the house on google earth. It is on a nice country lane with dry stacked stone walls on either side. The lots are very large, maybe five acres or more each. Being relatively close to Boston I would guess the going rate for the neighboring houses would be close to 1mil. If I were the OP I would hire a classical architect in the area who specializes in building new period homes and rehabbing others. Patrick Ahern, or someone like him, comes to mind. I don't think the original interpretation of the house was done very well; this is an opportunity of having a more authentic looking 1790s house on the outside and be more spacious, light and comfortable home on the inside.

From Google Maps (the address is on the drawings), facing west in Sutton, MA

Now my neck hurts

omg.  I love owls

seriously, its really weird, sometimes I spend hours looking at pictures of owls....sorry for getting off topic....you all may now proceed with your scolding...

What a great thread!  I can't decide which tangent I like best... but I think Mike Brady's necktie/ dinner napkin wins out.

How I wish we could set up a real office out of this virtual one here on Archinect.  Printer, plotter, coffee maker, library table, and lots and lots of jabber on this or that fun topic.

And I'm totally fine with giving Donna the glass-enclosed boss's office.

And another thing...

I just read the latest state license board newsletter.  Though I'm not proud of it, I always head straight for the list of shame/infractions.  One quasi-prominent faculty member representing their unlicensed self as an architect, for years.  Ouch!  

Another dude I went to high school with, and sat near in drafting class in 1977.  Licensed, but failed to execute an agreement.  (Seems like small potatoes, but the powers that be seem to be cracking down on this lately.)

Big Brother is watching, apparently...

Damn, all the really good threads start when I'm on charette. 

I just sent Michelle a link to this thread so she can see what kind of douchebag she has for a client, although I'm pretty sure she already has a very good idea because at this level it's really hard to hide it.

Also so she can sue him for publishing her proprietary work product online. 

Left side elevations and Right side elevations... :) Are there a different set of drawings to reference if one is standing in the rear yard? Hee hee. 

I think Michelle has more to worry about if she is calling herself an architect without the requisite license, unless this is one of those cases where the law is selectively enforced, which it may be, who knows. http://porch.com/auburn-ma/architects/michelle-rice-architectural-26150163/pp

Who knew that the house fire initiating the project might be the LEAST of everyone's problems?

Michelle seems to be operating within legal limits of section 60L, including title as I read it.

The real problem here is the OP.

"Damn, all the really good threads start when I'm on charette"

maybe we need a Miles Jaffe bat signal...it can be a graphic of a t-square smaking a client...

But, but, but- she has that neat little disclaimer about being "not responsible"

New to the site, love the thread

this. is epic.

what happened to brandon.o?  maybe he's shy?

welcome to the forums JeromeS

that's one crazy ass first floor.

Donna, click 'next' on your link.

Section 60L. Nothing in sections sixty A to sixty M, inclusive, shall be construed to prevent
1. The preparation of plans and specifications for and the supervision of the construction, enlargement or alteration of
(a) Any building containing less than thirty-five thousand cubic feet of enclosed space, the computation to be made according to rules to be established by the board;
(b) Any single or two-family house or any accessory building thereto;
(c) Any building used for farm purposes;
2. The preparation of plans and specifications for and the supervision of the alteration of any building not involving substantial and major structural change;
3. The preparation of any detailed or shop plans required to be furnished by a contractor, or the administration of construction contracts by persons customarily engaged in contracting work;

etc.

I've read both sections- she can prepare the plans but may not purport to be an architect.  I believe "architectural designer" is specifically included in the section

I wonder if this thread will last another 48 hours?

That's a lot of personal info to put up on the web for all to see isn't it?

Wonder if Brandon.O has witnessed our attacks on the unprofessional and isn't happy with the designer?  Maybe he learned he really needed a professional?

I'm siding with Michelle here. She's the victim in more ways than one and while the plans are what they are I've seen far worse from licensed architects. I wonder what her fee was for this? One wiff of Brand Zero says not much.

2. The preparation of plans and specifications for and the supervision of the alteration of any building not involving substantial and major structural change;

i'd say the work being done here, a remodel after a fire, may constitute substantial, and major structural change.

b3, thats an exemption for any building of any size...according to what miles posted, sfr and buildings under 35000 ft3 are exempt completely.  this is common in most states with exception of ny and ca.  In fact I believe MA does not have a practice act at all for landscape architecture.  Illinois, Massachusetts, and one other only have title acts and allow anyone to practice landscape architecture regardless of scale as long as they call it landscape design...must be very dangerous to live there... sarcasm.  

I would think you would need some experience in forensic architecture to know what to keep and what to demo after a fire, and how to get new material to work with the burnt material, and if the heat may have caused a change in material properties or even potentially the foundation's properties.  I don't think the attached drawings address that.

There is usually a non-standard structure clause that makes designs like this require a licensed professional to be involved.  Of course I don't know the extent of the damage so maybe this doesn't apply.  The OP said both existing to remain and everything new.

Often the most damage in a building fire is from water. You don't need a forensic engineer for that, you need good cleanup and mold abatement. Structural / MEP damage is obvious. 

We're talking small wood frame here. 

The firebug in me wants to see pictures of the burnt house... hope no one was hurt.

I'm siding with Michelle here. She's the victim in more ways than one and while the plans are what they are I've seen far worse from licensed architects. I wonder what her fee was for this? One wiff of Brand Zero says not much.

I'd agree.  Thinking about over-regulation.  Michelle is providing a service at a very small scale of construction.  There is, and has always been, a market for this kind of housing and the related drafting.  That this is seen as some sort of threat to professional architects strikes me as highly problematic.  It's a mini-set of plans for house.  The "public safety and welfare" crowd have zero argument in this arena.  It speaks volumes when "professionals" react to it with guns-a-blazing and waving of the rule book.

Any house that gets built needs to have safe MEP and structure, but this has been handled on houses by the trades and the occasional engineer when needed for decades.  Licensed architect?  Not needed.   To insist on the supposed value and necessity of such services via force of regulation is deplorable.

^ isn't that what regulation is for?

You got it.

I must be misunderstanding something, google her - she calls herself an architect doing architectural design in an architecture firm but she is not an architect and you guys say that is ok? Says they also do seismic design - perhaps she is an engineer? 

gruen, she is called an architect several places on the web - I looked at her business profiles on online yellow pages type things. (note, I have no desire to throw her under the bus, I personally don't care. I think she should be able to call herself an architect. Architecture is a bigger field than the licensure groupies have restricted it to, which is kinda the point.)

it is architectural design.   its a house which is architecture and its being designed.   this reminds me of something Louis CK said about "the N word".  He said that "all you are doing bu saying 'the N word' is making the listner say it in their head"  Every person will call these architectural plans regardless of what the label says.